Lab Grade RF Draft 2 Specification Webinar ... - Energy Star Grade RF Draft 2... · History of the…

  • View
    212

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Transcript

  • ENERGY STAR

    Laboratory Grade Refrigerators and Freezers

    Draft 2 Specification Webinar

    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency December 7, 2015

  • Introductions

    Melissa Fiffer EPA Lab Grade R/F Product Lead

    John Clinger ICF International

    2

  • History of the Effort to Date

    2008 Launch effort separated from CFS CRE

    2010 Redefined CRE as food grade only, removed lab grade equipment from scope

    2009 Started on test method development

    2010 Final test procedure based on the ASHRAE supplemental

    2010 Framework document distributed

    2011 DOE tested equipment and validated lab grade test method

    2012 DOE drafts Test Method

    2014 DOE finalized Test Method

    November 2014 Draft 1 Specification distributed

    2015 Version 1.0 Data Assembly Extension

    November 2015 Draft 2 Specification distributed

    3

  • Where Are We Now?

    4

  • Current Data Set

    Lab Grade Refrigerators 14 (2010 data)

    Lab Grade Freezers 12 (2010 data)

    Ultra-Low Freezers 3 data points (plus 8 models from DOE 2013 field testing)

    Note: After the call for data in December 2014 / January 2015, EPA did receive very

    limited product data on a few ULT models and would like to thank those stakeholders who

    provided the data for their contributions.

    5

  • Reminder of Product Family Definition

    EPA is proposing the following definition of a product family:

    Made by the same manufacturer

    Have the same measured interior volume

    Have the same number of external doors

    Use same basic engineering design

    Product models within a family can differ in aesthetic characteristics and interior

    configurability

    Consistent with how we address product families in other specifications, EPA proposed

    that the highest energy-consuming unit in a product family will serve as the

    Representative Model for testing purposes

    6

  • Scope Inclusions

    Lab Grade Refrigerators

    Set points between 0 C and 12 C

    Storing of non volatile reagents and biological specimens

    Usually marketed through lab equipment supply stores and distributors

    Lab Grade Freezers

    Set points between - 40 C and 0 C

    Storing of non volatile reagents and biological specimens

    Usually marketed through lab equipment supply stores and distributors

    7

  • Scope Exclusions

    Ultra-Low Temperature Freezers (ULTs)

    Combination Laboratory Grade Refrigerators/Freezers

    Portable Laboratory Grade Refrigerators/Freezers

    Walk-in Laboratory Grade Refrigerators/Freezers

    Explosion Proof Refrigerators/Freezers

    Incubators

    Or products that are capable of temperature control above 15 C

    Products designed specifically to store blood and plasma samples

    8

  • Proposed Removal of ULTs From Scope of Version 1.0

    EPA did not receive enough data to be able to differentiate ULT products in the market

    As a result, EPA is proposing to remove them from scope of the Version 1.0

    specification.

    EPA welcomes additional data on ULT products to help build a more robust data set that

    can form the foundation for including ULTs in scope of the next revision of this

    specification.

    9

  • MDEC Metric Requirements for Version 1.0

    EPA is proposing the Maximum Daily Energy Consumption (MDEC) criteria measured in

    kWh/day for refrigerators and freezers in Version 1.0

    Aligns with approach used in commercial refrigerators and freezers

    Proposed efficiency requirements enable representation across a range of refrigerator

    and freezer volumes and defrost strategies, while maintaining a straightforward

    approach based on the performance data received

    10

  • Proposed Refrigerator MDEC Requirements

    Separated by volume only

    Products with glass doors in the data set show an average total energy consumed per

    volume that is 41% lower than products with solid doors (counter-intuitive)

    This aligns with previous findings in 2010 document that determined the data set

    does not support separating refrigerators by door type.

    Not enough data to support separating refrigerators by defrost type

    14 refrigerators still on the market in the current data set

    11

  • Proposed Refrigerator MDEC Requirements Continued

    12

    0

    2

    4

    6

    8

    10

    12

    14

    16

    0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

    Tota

    l Dai

    ly E

    ne

    rgy

    Co

    nsu

    mp

    tio

    n (

    kWh

    /day

    )

    Volume (cubic feet)

    All Refrigerators (Total = 14)

    Auto DefrostRefrigerators

    Manual DefrostRefrigerators

    Proposed Level

  • Proposed Freezer MDEC Requirements

    Separated by defrost type and by volume

    All freezers in data set have solid doors

    12 total freezers still on the market in current data set

    13

  • Proposed Freezer MDEC Requirements Continued

    14

    0.00

    5.00

    10.00

    15.00

    20.00

    25.00

    30.00

    0 10 20 30 40 50 60

    Tota

    l Dai

    ly E

    ne

    rgy

    Co

    nsu

    mp

    tio

    n (

    kWh

    /day

    )

    Volume (cubic feet)

    All Freezers (Total = 12)

    Manual DefrostFreezers

    Auto DefrostFreezers

    Proposed ManualDefrost Level

    Proposed AutoDefrost Level

  • Additional Considerations

    EPA is aware that the ENERGY STAR dataset is aged, and that the following areas of

    efficiency innovation are on the market and available for adoption by lab grade

    refrigerator and freezer manufacturers:

    auto-off lighting combined with the use of LED lights;

    energy efficient low-E glass used in glass door refrigerators;

    more efficient cooling compressors; more advanced microprocessor temperature

    control and defrost sensors;

    more efficient high-capacity air circulation systems, as well as hot gas defrost

    solutions; and

    low global warming potential, energy efficient alternative refrigerant options

    EPA intends to highlight for buyers products that are employing some of these

    innovations now and incentivize broad use of these and other efficiency approaches in

    future specification revisions.

    15

  • Timeline

    Written comments are due by December 18, 2015

    Please send comments to labgraderefrigeration@energystar.gov

    Based on feedback, EPA will determine whether an additional draft is necessary prior to the final draft

    EPA intends to finalize the Version 1.0 specification in Q1 of 2016. The specification will take effect upon finalization.

    16

    mailto:labgraderefrigeration@energystar.gov

  • Final Questions or Comments?

    17

  • 18

  • ENERGY STAR is the simple choice for

    energy efficiency. 19

    Please send any additional comments to labgraderefrigeration@energystar.gov or contact:

    Melissa Fiffer EPA ENERGY STAR Program Fiffer.Melissa@epa.gov

    John Clinger ICF International John.Clinger@icfi.com

    Bryan Berringer DOE ENERGY STAR Program Bryan.Berringer@ee.doe.gov

    mailto:labgraderefrigeration@energystar.govmailto:Kent.Christopher@epa.govmailto:Erica.Porras@icfi.commailto:Kent.Christopher@epa.govmailto:Kent.Christopher@epa.gov